Set camera to unavailable when camera fps == 0

[NickM-27]

No description provided.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #526 (701daaf) into dev (a0d1834) will not change coverage.
Report is 1 commits behind head on dev.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               dev      #526   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files           15        15           
  Lines         1941      1952   +11     
=========================================
+ Hits          1941      1952   +11     

Files Changed	Coverage Δ
custom_components/frigate/__init__.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
custom_components/frigate/camera.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

[NickM-27]

Closes #406

[dermotduffy]

Looks good:

• I bet that multi-line return method is reducible to a single line and still relatively readable, e.g: (not-tested) return self.coordinator.get('data', {}).get(self._cam_name, {}).get("camera_fps", 0) != 0
• Mind adding a test to verify the unavailable behavior?

[NickM-27]

Looks good:

• I bet that multi-line return method is reducible to a single line and still relatively readable, e.g: (not-tested) return self.coordinator.get('data', {}).get(self._cam_name, {}).get("camera_fps", 0) != 0
• Mind adding a test to verify the unavailable behavior?

Yeah I was mainly just wanting to fit the existing structure since I wasn't sure if there were other reasons for it. That should be fine though 👍

[NickM-27]

@dermotduffy it makes no sense why this doesn't work, it works in HASS when I test with my cameras

the only thing I can say is that there seems to be a slight delay from when it goes available//unavailable that is longer than the sync_interval

[NickM-27]

@dermotduffy Do you have any suggestions? It works as expected in HA, wondering if the unavailable check doesn't work in the tests for some reason

[dermotduffy]

@NickM-27 It was a combination of a test issue that you'll kick yourself over (not passing the test client), and a nasty (and real) multiple inheritance bug that maybe you should kick me over ;-)

[NickM-27]

Ah that'll do it, thank you!

[dermotduffy]

Thanks @NickM-27 !